DOCSLIB.ORG

03 E 86/2012 Response from FEANTSA

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
03 E 86/2012 Response from FEANTSA EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF SOCIAL RIGHTS COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DES DROITS SOCIAUX 25 February 2013 Case No. 3 European Federation of National Organisations working with the Homeless (FEANTSA) v The Netherlands Complaint No 86/2012 RESPONSE FROM FEANTSA TO THE GOVERNMENT’S SUBMISSIONS ON THE ADMISSIBILITY AND ON THE MERITS Registered at the Secretariat on 19 February 2013 Mr. Luis JIMENA QUESADA, President Mr. Régis Brillat, Executive Secretary European Committee of Social Rights Directorate General of Human Rights – DG II Council of Europe Agora Building Avenue de l’Europe 67075 Strasbourg Cedex France European Federation of National Organisations working with the Homeless (FEANTSA) vs The Netherlands Complaint No. 86/2012 RESPONSE TO THE GOVERNMENT SUBMISSIONS ON ADMISSIBILITY AND MERITS Brussels, Belgium 19 February 2013 Contact: [email protected] and [email protected] OBSERVATIONS ON ADMISSIBILITY Introduction In the observations on collective complaint 86/2012 The Netherlands government claims partial inadmissibility of the complaint on two grounds. The first ground relates to the exclusion of undocumented migrants from the scope of the Revised European Social Charter (hereinafter: the Revised Charter) on the basis of Paragraph 1 of the Appendix. The second ground relates to the limitation that is mentioned in paragraphs 4 and 7 of Article 19 of the Revised Charter. First Ground: Scope of the Revised Charter As observed by The Netherlands government the scope of the Revised Charter is clearly stated in paragraph 1 of the Appendix. The paragraph states that the scope of the Revised Charter does not extend to undocumented migrants. The European Committee on Social Rights (hereinafter: the Committee) on two occasions has extended the scope of the Revised Charter to include undocumented migrants.1 FEANTSA observes that, although in both collective complaints children were concerned, the reasoning of the Committee for declaring the complaints admissible can be applied in the current complaint. The reasoning was based on the notion that the existence of human dignity could only be properly assessed in the merits stage of the complaints procedure. In the current complaint human dignity is as much at stake as in the complaints mentioned before. FEANTSA further observes that the Revised Charter, similar to the European Convention of Human Rights, is a living instrument that needs to be interpreted in light of current day human rights standards. On the basis of these arguments FEANTSA submits that the first argument of The Netherlands government should be dismissed. Second Ground: Scope of Article 19 of the Revised Charter FEANTSA is of the opinion that the scope of Article 19 of the Revised Charter is not a ground for admissibility. The complaint does not only involve undocumented migrants. The application of Article 19 to the complaint should therefore be determined in the merits stage of the complaints procedure. Conclusion FEANTSA submits that both grounds regarding admissibility relied on by The Netherlands government should be dealt with in the merits stage of the complaint. FEANTSA therefore asks the Committee to declare Collective Complaint 86/2012 admissible in its entirety. OBSERVATIONS ON THE MERITS Treaty obligations FEANTSA notes that The Netherlands government in its submissions on several occasions refers to the duties of the municipalities and, in relation to quality of shelters, shelter organizations. Although the legal framework in The Netherlands may allocate the roles as described by the government, that does not alter the obligations on the basis of the European Social Charter. It is the State that is bound by the Treaty. The Treaty does not specify how the State organizes itself. It is clear however, that the State at the international level acts as one. That means that the national government cannot hide behind the local authorities when it comes to breaches of the treaty obligations. It is up to the national government to guarantee compliance with the Treaty. It is the national government that can be called to account regarding their obligations at the international level. The Netherlands government fails to recognize this principle. 1 Collective Complaints No. 14/2003 (FIDH v. France) and No, 47/2008 (DCI v. The Netherlands) Nationwide access The Dutch government submits that the law and practice guarantee nationwide access. There are countless examples in which it is proven that this submission of the government is false. The fact that the government submits this statement is not helping the establishment of facts on which the Committee is to base its Decision on the Merits. The Dutch government refers to the Action Plan of the national government with the so-called G4 cities (Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht), and the “Urban Compasses” for the other 39 municipalities responsible for (emergency) shelter. Although the government provides numbers concerning the Action Plan that does not show the extent to which the Action Plan and Urban Compasses solve the problem. The government shows that a target was set for the G4, and that that target was met. What needs to be shown is whether the target is a meaningful contribution to the problem that exists. Moreover, the question can be asked: what do these numbers say about the other 39 cities in terms of (emergency) shelter? In paragraph 19 of their submissions the Dutch government refers to the VNG guidelines for nationwide access. The government submits that this guarantees nationwide access. This, unfortunately is not the case. The guidelines are not binding on the municipalities, whatever the actions taken by the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. The Dutch government admits that municipalities have applied the local connection criterion. The government should show for the purpose of this complaint that they take an active approach to guarantee nationwide access. The government cannot rely, as they do, on the homeless shelters alone to bring local connection issues to their attention. These organizations are often responsible for the execution of the policy. The government should do its own research and take appropriate measures to ensure nationwide access. In the current submission, the government does not even provide one example of how the Ministry has dealt with this issue in the past. The Dutch government refers to a list of contact persons to be used in case a person needs to be transferred to another region. This list exists, but has not been updated since 31 October 2011. It is not complete and also refers to contact persons who are employees of shelter organizations. Not all of the contact persons on the list are currently employed by the municipalities. And, not all contact persons have the authority to register people in the Municipal People’s Register (GBA) which in effect bars people from access to an ID, shelter and social assistance. To sum up, the list is out of date and rarely used. If the list were to work, the inter-authority discussions the Dutch government refers to in paragraph 20 do not offer a solution for a homeless person who is denied access. In other words, an inter-authority discussion cannot serve as (emergency) shelter. Example A striking example of how local connection and other criteria work can be found in the record of one man. Take the example of person who has moved around; someone who has stayed with friends, been in prison, lived outside of The Netherlands, and has lived on the streets. The lack of clarity regarding where he “belongs” has led to a number of requests for help. • On 1 March 2012 shelter and social assistance is requested form the municipality of Rotterdam. It is decided that the applicant does not meet the criteria “regiobinding” and “lawful residence” as set by the municipality (attachment 1G). • On 1 March 2012 shelter and social assistance is requested form the municipality of Breda. It is determined that there is no connection with Breda, and that the person needs to request help in Purmerend (attachment 1C). There is no help offered with the transfer. • On 9 March 2012 shelter and social assistance is requested from the municipality of Zutphen. It is determined that there was no formal request, and that it is unclear why Zutphen was contacted. It is also mentioned that help can only be given to migrants with appropriate documents (Attachment 1B). • On 21 March 2012 shelter and social assistance is requested from the municipality of Purmerend. It is determined that there is a need, but that the responsibility lies with another city (Arnhem) or the Immigration Services (IND) (Attachment 1A). • On 3 April 2012 shelter and social assistance is requested from the municipality of Vught. It is determined that the applicant needs to request help at the municipality of ‘s- Hertogenbosch, one of the 43 responsible municipalities for homeless shelter (attachment 1D). The request for help is “not processed” because of lack of jurisdiction. • On 18 April 2012 shelter and social assistance is requested from the municipality of ‘s- Hertogenbosch. It is determined that the municipality of Arnhem is most suitable and that the lack of residence permit makes the applicant ineligible for help (attachment 1E). There is no further action taken by ‘s-Hertogenbosch. • On 12 July 2012 upon a request for shelter and social assistance the municipality of Delft it is decided that the applicant does not stand a chance for help for reasons of, amongst others, registration issues (GBA, shelter), last known registration in Purmerend, and being undocumented (attachment 1F). This is just the example of one person. Other examples like this exist. The example shows that is it standing practice to add criteria other than “need”. Rotterdam for instance lists five (5) criteria: under 23 years old, lawful residence, local connection, social resilience, OGGZ criterion (psychiatric issues). Other cities apply similar criteria.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • European Homelessness and COVID-19 3
    European Homelessness and COVID 19 Nicholas Pleace Isabel Baptista Lars Benjaminsen Volker Busch Geertsema Eoin O’Sullivan Nóra Teller Acknowledgements This report draws on research, interviewing homelessness service providers and reviewing available information, conducted within the home countries of the members of the European Observatory on Homelessness (EoH): Isabel Baptista (Portugal); Lars Benjaminsen (Denmark); Volker Busch-Geertsema (Germany); Eoin O’Sullivan (Ireland), Nóra Teller (Hungary) and, in 2020, prior to leaving the EU, the UK (Nicholas Pleace). The most recent EoH comparative research for the 10th report in the series, exploring staffing in homelessness services in Europe1, was conducted as COVID-19 was causing the first waves of lockdowns. The result of this work, which covered the immediate impacts of COVID-19 on homelessness services in: Belgium; Croatia; the Czech Republic; Denmark; Finland; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Italy; the Netherlands; Poland; Portugal; Slovenia; Spain; and the UK, are also drawn upon on here. The report also draws on a range of other resources, including FEANTSA’s own data collection, analysis by the Deputy Director, Ruth Owen, and inputs from the Director, Freek Spinnewijn. As always, the work of EoH presented here benefits from Mike Allen’s (Focus Ireland) input and comments. Sources from outside Europe are also used in trying to understand and consider the possible long-term effects of COVID-19 on homelessness and housing exclusion as the pandemic continues to unfold. People working in homelessness services across Europe also supported the research at an extremely challenging time. Our sincere thanks are due to all those who contributed both directly and indirectly to this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Homeless Bill Fo Rights
    Advocating for the rights of homeless people The Homeless Bill of Rights User Guide A handbook for social actors to engage with the Homeless Bill of Rights The Homeless Bill of Rights User Guide ABOUT THE EUROPEAN CAMPAIGN ........................................................................................... 1 POLICY CONTEXT .......................................................................................................................... 2 OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................................... 3 WHAT IS THE HOMELESS BILL OF RIGHTS?.................................................................................... 3 ENDORSING THE HOMELESS BILL OF RIGTHS .............................................................................. 6 DIRECT ENDORSEMENT BY THE MUNICIPALITY: ....................................................................... 7 PARTICIPATORY PROCESS OF ACTORS AT LOCAL LEVEL: .................................................... 7 IMPLEMENTING THE HOMELESS BILL OF RIGHTS ......................................................................... 10 INVOLVING THE HOMELESS PEOPLE THEMSELVES ..................................................................... 10 MONITORING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BILL ...................................................................... 10 CONTACT ..................................................................................................................................... 11 The Homeless
    [Show full text]
  • The Finnish National Programme to Reduce Long-Term Homelessness
    PEER REVIEW IN SOCIAL PROTECTION AND SOCIAL INCLUSION 2010 THE FINNISH NATIONAL PROGRAMME TO REDUCE LONG-TERM HOMELESSNESS HELSINKI, 2–3 DECEMBER 2010 SYNTHESIS REPORT On behalf of the European Commission Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion PEER REVIEW IN SOCIAL PROTECTION AND SOCIAL INCLUSION 2010 THE FINNISH NATIONAL PROGRAMME TO REDUCE LONG-TERM HOMELEssNEss VOLKER BUSCH-GEERTSEMA AssOCIATION FOR INNOVATIVE SOCIAL RESEARCH AND SOCIAL PLANNING (GISS, BREMEN, GERMANY) HELSINKI, 2–3 DECEMBER 2010 SYNTHESIS REPORT On behalf of the European Commission Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion This publication is supported for under the European Community Programme for Employment and Social Solidarity (2007–2013). This programme is managed by the Directorate-Generale for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion of the European Commission. It was established to financially support the implementation of the objectives of the European Union in the employment and social affairs area, as set out in the Social Agenda, and thereby contribute to the achievement of the Lisbon Strategy goals in these fields. The seven-year Programme targets all stakeholders who can help shape the development of appropriate and effective employment and social legislation and policies, across the EU-27, EFTA-EEA and EU candidate and pre-candidate countries. PROGRESS mission is to strengthen the EU contribution in support of Member States’ commitments and efforts to create more and better jobs and to build a more cohesive society. To that effect, PROGRESS will be instrumental in: • providing analysis and policy advice on PROGRESS policy areas; • monitoring and reporting on the implementation of EU legislation and policies in PROGRESS policy areas; • promoting policy transfer, learning and support among Member States on EU 2 objectives and priorities; and • relaying the views of the stakeholders and society at large.
    [Show full text]
  • Asylum Seekers, Refugees and Homelessness : the Humanitarian Crisis and the Homelessness Sector in Europe
    This is a repository copy of Asylum Seekers, Refugees and Homelessness : The Humanitarian Crisis and the Homelessness Sector in Europe. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/111072/ Monograph: Baptista, Isabel, Benjaminsen, Lars, Busch-Geertsema, Volker et al. (2 more authors) (2016) Asylum Seekers, Refugees and Homelessness : The Humanitarian Crisis and the Homelessness Sector in Europe. Research Report. FEANTSA , Brussels. Reuse Creative Commons: Public Domain Dedication Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ European Observatory on Homelessness Asylum Seekers, Refugees and Homelessness The Humanitarian Crisis and the Homelessness Sector in Europe EOH Comparative Studies on Homelessness Brussels – December 2016 n n n n n Acknowledgements This research was made possible by the contributions of experts from 12 EU Member States. Our sincere thanks to everyone who supported the research. Limited space means it has not always been possible fully to reflect the often highly detailed responses we received with regard to each Member State. The following experts and the research team undertook interviews with key stakeholders and reviewed existing research and statistical data to complete the comparative ques- tionnaire devised by the research team: Marja Katisko (Finland)
    [Show full text]
  • Homeless in Europe Spring 2019
    The Magazine of FEANTSA - The European Federation of National Organisations Working with the Homeless AISBL Homeless in Europe Spring 2019 The state of emergency shelters Editorial IN THIS ISSUE The state of emergency shelters in Europe 2 Editorial By Chloé Serme-Morin, FEANTSA 3 Intentionality in the homelessness system According to FEANTSA & Foundation Abbé Pierre accommodation in Europe remains genuinely across Great Britain, estimations in their 4th Overview of Housing Exclu- conditional. The conditionality of access to emer- Francesca Albanese sion in Europe, at least 700,000 homeless people gency accommodation is mainly demonstrated in are sleeping rough or in emergency/temporary the way the public response is structured to deal 6 Shelters in the Netherlands: accommodation on one night in the European with homelessness: seasonal management that How to get in and Union. It is an increase of 70% compared to ten responds to weather conditions, which undermines how to get out, years ago. the need to adopt continuous strategies in the fight Marjolijn van Zeeland against homelessness. Access to emergency accom- 8 Access to shelters Over the last ten years, the number of homeless modation is also determined by a difficult admission for irregular migrants, people has increased at an alarming rate in almost process, where multiple selection and prioritisation Mauro Striano all European Union countries: broadly speaking, this criteria limit access and exemplify the selectiveness increase has led to the explosion in the number of of the right to accommodation. 10 The Unconditional right people needing emergency shelter. In Italy in 2016, to emergency shelter in the 75% of homeless people were permitted access to Emergency accommodation services, in the sense of light of homeless services emergency accommodation.
    [Show full text]
  • FEANTSA's Input for the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Housing Discrimination and Spatial Segregation
    FEANTSA Working together to end Homelessness in Europe May 14th 2021 FEANTSA’s input for the United Nations Special Rapporteur on housing discrimination and spatial segregation The European Federation of National Organisations working with the homeless, FEANTSA, is the only European organization fighting to end homelessness in Europe. We have members in all EU countries. FEANTSA and its members understand homelessness as a situation that deprives individuals of their fundamental rights, including the right to housing. For FEANTSA, widespread homelessness is evidence of the failure of the States to protect and ensure the human rights of the most vulnerable in Europe. We engage in the protection of the right to housing primarily through transnational exchanges, direct advocacy, and research. FEANTSA has developed a European Typology of Homelessness and housing exclusion (ETHOS) as a means of improving understanding and measurement of homelessness in Europe, and to provide a common "language" for transnational exchanges on homelessness. ETHOS categories attempt to cover all living situations which amount to forms of homelessness: rooflessness (without a shelter, sleeping rough), houselessness (with a place to sleep but temporary in institutions or shelter), living in insecure housing (threatened with severe exclusion due to insecure tenancies, eviction, domestic violence) and living in inadequate housing (in caravans on illegal campsites, in unfit housing, in extreme overcrowding).1 In this submission, we would like to focus on the non-exhaustive information provided by some of our members, mainly homeless service providers, as well as data provided by the FEANTSA Secretariat in Brussels. We have access to additional information on this topic via the Housing Rights Watch wider network.2 Housing discrimination and spatial segregation in Europe The pandemic has created momentum for tackling structural discrimination, poverty, and homelessness in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Homelessness and Housing Exclusion in the EU Social Inclusion Process
    Part B _ Policy Review 127 Homelessness and Housing Exclusion in the EU Social Inclusion Process Michele Calandrino Policy Analyst, European Commission1 >> Abstract_ Despite certain governance and analytical limitations of the EU social inclusion process in dealing with homelessness and housing exclusion, important advances have been made recently in this area. These achieve- ments include the development of enhanced statistical data and indicators, a strengthened political commitment by the EU institutions and member states and new regulations extending the eligibility of EU funding for housing inter- ventions. The elements that facilitated this progress included a better balance between general and thematic approaches within the EU social inclusion process, the role of the PROGRESS programme in channelling academic research into the policy debate, the evidence collected at EU level in the context of social monitoring of the economic crisis and the political agreement at EU level on an overarching policy framework (the active inclusion strategy). >> Keywords_ Homelessness, Open Method of Co-ordination, Social Exclusion. 1 This paper reflects the personal views of the author only. ISSN 2030-2762 / ISSN 2030-3106 online 128 European Journal of Homelessness _ Volume 4, December 2010 Introduction This paper starts by looking at the process that led to the choice of homelessness and housing exclusion (HHE) as the 2009 social inclusion focus theme of the Open Method of Coordination on Social Protection and Social Inclusion (Social OMC). It highlights the main problems in addressing HHE in the European Union policy framework and the ways in which they have been overcome. It then analyses the activities carried out in 2009 and their main outcomes, focusing on the strengths and weaknesses of such a process.
    [Show full text]
  • The Growing Criminalization of Homelessness in Hungary – a Brief Overview Rita Bence and Éva Tessza Udvarhelyi
    Part B _ Policy Reviews 133 The Growing Criminalization of Homelessness in Hungary – A Brief Overview Rita Bence and Éva Tessza Udvarhelyi Hungarian Civil Liberties Union The City is for All Introduction Hungary is in the news these days. Most recently, the country appeared in interna- tional headlines because of the latest modification of the constitution (now officially called Fundamental Law), which represents a significant step in the codification of an increasingly authoritarian legal and political regime. Besides other issues such as infringing on the freedom of the press and the independence of the Supreme Court and introducing measures that penalize poverty, the intensive criminalization of street homelessness has been a hallmark of the current government. In the following, we first provide a historical background to these recent events by examining state policies towards homelessness in the past few decades. Then, we present the legal developments that have led to Hungary becoming the first country in the world that specifically allows for the penalization of street homelessness in its highest law. Housing Poverty in Hungary under State Socialism While large-scale housing poverty has been a great problem in Hungary throughout the 20th century, the eruption of visible homelessness is usually associated with the country’s transition from state socialism to capitalism in the late 1980s. In order to understand the “sudden” appearance of homelessness, we will examine policies regarding housing and homelessness under state socialism, discuss the causes that led to the greater visibility of homelessness around the regime change, and explore the ways in which the Hungarian state is currently dealing with this problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Caring for the Homeless and the Poor in Greece: Implications for the Future of Social Protection and Social Inclusion»
    «Caring for the Homeless and the Poor in Greece: Implications for the Future of Social Protection and Social Inclusion» Executive Summary Arapoglou V.P., Gounis K., Assistant Professors, Department of sociology University of Crete With the assistance of Siatitsa D., PhD candidate, National Technical University of Athens Rethymno, October 2014 Acknowledgement: Research has been supported by the Hellenic Observatory at the LSE and the National Bank of Greece - Research Innovation Fund on South East Europe (NBG Research Call 2- 2013). The views expressed in this text are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Hellenic Observatory or the National Bank of Greece. The final report of the project is available upon request from the authors or the Hellenic Observatory. This is the executive summary of the report presenting findings from the study “Caring for the homeless and the poor in Greece: implications for the future of social protection and social inclusion,” which was supported by the Hellenic Observatory at the LSE and the National Bank of Greece Research Innovation Fund on South East Europe Crete. The research was carried out between November 2013 and October 2014. The aim of the research, divided into two distinct work packages, was: a) in “WP1: Mapping homelessness, shelter and service provisions in Athens,” to provide estimates of housing deprivation and homelessness and to map their spatial distribution,in connection with the services that are addressed to the affected populations, in the metropolitan region of the city of Athens; and b) in “WP2: Exploring the efficacy of existing provisions and social innovation strategies,”to highlight innovative policies to tackle homelessness, which have been introduced during the last decade in the US and Europe, and discuss the applicability of diverse forms of supported housing schemes to Greece.
    [Show full text]
  • HC3.1 Homeless Population Estimates
    OECD Affordable Housing Database – http://oe.cd/ahd OECD - Social Policy Division - Directorate of Employment, Labour and Social Affairs HC3.1. HOMELESS POPULATION Definitions and methodology This indicator presents available data at national level on the number of people reported by public authorities as homeless. Data are drawn from the OECD Questionnaire on Affordable and Social Housing (QuASH 2021, QuASH 2019, QuASH 2016) and other available sources. Overall, homelessness data are available for 36 countries (Table HC 3.1.1 in Annex I). Further discussion of homelessness can be found in the 2020 OECD Policy Brief, “Better data and policies to fight homelessness in the OECD”, available online (and in French). Discussion of national strategies to combat homelessness can be found in indicator HC3.2 National Strategies for combating homelessness. Comparing homeless estimates across countries is difficult, as countries do not define or count the homeless population in the same way. There is no internationally agreed definition of homelessness. Therefore, this indicator presents a collection of available statistics on homelessness in OECD, EU and key partner countries in line with definitions used in national surveys (comparability issues on the data are discussed below). Even within countries, different definitions of homelessness may co-exist. In this indicator, we refer only to the statistical definition used for data collection purposes. Detail on who is included in the number of homeless in each country, i.e. the definition used for statistical purposes, is presented in Table HC 3.1.2 at the end of this indicator. To facilitate comparison of the content of homeless statistics across countries, it is also indicated whether the definition includes the categories outlined in Box HC3.1, based on “ETHOS Light” (FEANTSA, 2018).
    [Show full text]
  • Falling Through the Cracks: Exposing Inequalities in the EU and Beyond
    FALLING THROUGH THE CRACKS EXPOSING INEQUALITIES IN THE EU AND BEYOND MAKE EUROPE SUSTAINABLE F R ALL This report is published by: SDG Watch Europe, Make Europe Sustainable for All and Faces of Inequality Coordinating organisations: European Environmental Bureau, Global Call to Action Against Poverty, SOLIDAR and World Vision Overall report coordination: Ingo Ritz, Global Call to Action Against Poverty & Patrizia Heidegger and Sonia Goicoechea, European Environmental Bureau Date of publication: June 2019 Editors: Sylvia Beales and George Gelber, BealesGelber Consult agency, and Tanja Gohlert, Global Call to Action Against Poverty Graphic design: Hearts & Minds - Brussels - www.heartsnminds.eu Designer of cover illustration: Gemma Bowcock, European Environmental Bureau The views expressed in the different chapters are the sole responsibility of the authors. This publication has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of “Make Europe Sustainable For All” project and can under no circumstances be taken as reflecting the position of the European Union. TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 WHERE IS THE EU WITH FIGHTING INEQUALITY? 8 COUNTRY SUMMARIES 13 Austria 14 Czech Republic 16 France 18 Germany 20 Greece 22 Ireland 24 Italy 26 Lithuania 28 Table of contents of Table Luxembourg 30 The Netherlands 32 3 Poland 34 Portugal 36 Romania 38 Slovenia 40 Spain 42 REFLECTIONS ON HOW ACTION ON SDG 10 IS INCLUDED IN THE VOLUNTARY 44 NATIONAL REVIEWS (VNRS)
    [Show full text]
  • The ETHOS Definition and Classification of Homelessness: an Analysis
    Part A _ Articles 19 The ETHOS Definition and Classification of Homelessness: An Analysis Kate Amore, Michael Baker and Philippa Howden-Chapman Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand >> Abstract_ Defining homelessness has long been a topic of debate, but inter- national agreement is elusive, and most of the various definitions of homeless- ness in use across the world are not conceptually grounded. The two aims of this paper are: to provide an analysis and critique of the validity of the European Typology of Homelessness and Housing Exclusion (ETHOS), which is arguably the most prominent definition and classification of homelessness with an articulated theoretical foundation in current use; and to propose a modified approach to conceptualising homelessness that the authors have developed. We begin by describing a set of considerations and criteria that can be used for assessing any system of measurement. Two parts of the ETHOS concep- tualisation are then examined: the conceptual model, and the typology of subgroups that make up the homeless and housing excluded populations. Each part is found to have conceptual weaknesses that compromise its validity. A modified definition and classification of homelessness, which we think overcomes these weaknesses, is proposed. >> Key Words_ Homelessness; definition; classification; ETHOS; measurement; New Zealand. ISSN 2030-2762 / ISSN 2030-3106 online 20 European Journal of Homelessness _ Volume 5, No. 2, December 2011 Introduction How homelessness should be defined is a fundamental and persistent problem. Relatively little progress has been made toward achieving international agreement in the twenty years since Greve and Currie (1990, p. 28) wrote: “what constitutes ‘homelessness’ and how many people are homeless is a debate which has been running for thirty years or more”.
    [Show full text]